Bessie Freed trading as Book's Furs

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER OF BESSIE FREED TRADING AS BOOK' S FURS ET AL. CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODCCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 1437. Complaint, Oct. 14, 1.G8-Decision, Oct. 14, 196'8 Consent order requiring a Scranton, Pa., retail furrier to cease misbranding falsely invoicing, and deceptively advertising its fur products. COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Bessie Freed, an individual trading as Book's Furs, and Margaret D. Kirias, individually and as manager of Book's Furs, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows:

PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Bessie Freed is an individual trading as Book's Furs. Respondent Margaret D. Kirias is manager of Book' s Furs. They control, direct and formulate the acts, practices and policies of Book's Furs.

Respondents are retailers of fur products with their offce and principal place of business located at 428 Lackawanna Avenue Scranton, Pennsylvania.

BOOK S FURS ET AL. 1049 1048 Complaint PAR. 2. Respondents are now, and for some time last past have been, engaged in the introduction into commerce, and in the sale advertising, and offering for sale in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution in commerce, of fur products; and have sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of furs which have been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms commerce fur" and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act.

PAR. 3. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were falsely and deceptively labeled to show that fur contained therein was natural, when in fact such fur was pointed bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Section 4 (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. PAR. 4. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were not labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto were fur products with labels which failed: 1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in any such fur product.

2. To disclose that the fur contained in the fur products was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, \\'hen such was the fact.

3. To show the name, or other identification issued and registered by the Commission, of one or more of the persons who manufactured any such fur product for introduction into commerce introduced it into commerce, sold it in commerce, advertised or offered it for sale, in commerce, or transported or distributed it in commerce.

4. To show the country of origin of the imported furs contained in the fur products.

PAR. 5. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects:

(a) The term "natural" was not used on lahels to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule 19 (g) of said Rules and Regulations.

Complaint 74 F.

(b) Information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in handwriting on labels, in violation of Rule 29 (b) of said Rules and Regulations. (c) Information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was not set forth in the required sequence, in violation of Rule 30 of said Rules and Regulations. , in (d) Required item numbers were not set forth on labels violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced by the respondents in that they were not invoiced as required by Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under such Act. Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products covered by invoices which failed:

1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in any such fur product.

2. To disclose that the fur contained in the fur products was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artifcially colored, when such was the fact.

PAR. 7. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not invoiced in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects: (a) Information required under Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations.

(b) The term "Persian Lamb" was not set forth on invoices in the manner required by law, in violation of Rule 8 of said Rules and Regulations.

, in (c) Required item numbers were not set forth on invoices violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 8. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively advertised in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that certain advertisements intended to aid, promote and assist offering for sale of such directly or indirectly, in the sale and fur products were not in accordance with the provisions of Section BOOK S FURS ET AI,. 1051 1048 Complaint 5 (a) of the said Act.

Among and included in the aforesaid advertisements but not limited thereto, were advertisements of respondents which appeared in issues of the Scrantonian, a newspaper published in the city of Scranton, State of Pennsylvania, and having a wide circulation in Pennsylvania and in other States of the United States. Among such false and deceptive advertisements, but not limited thereto, were advertisements which failed to show the true animal name of the fur used in any such fur product. PAR. 9. By means of the aforesaid advertisements and others of similar import and meaning not specifically referred to herein respondents falsely and deceptively advertised fur products in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that the said fur products were not advertised in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects: (a) The term "Persian Lamb" was not set forth in the manner required, in violation of Rule 8 of the said Rules and Regulations. (b) The term "Dyed Broadtail-processed Lamb" was not set forth in the manner required, in violation of Rule 10 of the said Rules and Regulations.

(c) The term "natural" was not used to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule J 9 (g) of the said Rules and Regulations.

(d) All parts of the information required under Section 5 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder were not set forth in type of equal size and conspicuousness and in close proximity with each other, in violation of Rule 38 (a) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations. PAR. 10. By means of the aforesaid advertisements and others of similar import and meaning not specifically referred to herein respondents falsely and deceptively advertised fur products in that certain of said fur products were falsely or deceptively identified with respect to the name or designation of the animal or animals that produced the fur from which the said fur products had been manufactured, in violation of Section 5 (a) (5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

Among such falsely and deceptively advertised fur products, but not limited thereto were fur products advertised as "Broadtail" thereby implying that the furs contained therein were entitled to the designation "Broadtail Lamb " when in truth and in fact, the furs contained therein were not entitled to such designation. Decision and Order 74 F.

PAR. 11. Respondents have removed and mutilated and have caused and participated in the removal and mutilation of, prior to the time fur products subject to the provisions of the Fur Product Labehng Act were sold and delivered to the ultimate consumer labels required by the Fur Products Labehng Act to he affxed to such products, in violation of Section 3 (d) of said Act. PAR. 12. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISION AND ORDER The Federal Trade Commission having initiated an investigation of certain acts and practices of the respondents named in the caption hereof, and the respondents having been furnished thereafter with a copy of a draft of complaint which the Bureau of Textiles and Furs proposed to present to the Commission for its consideration and which, if issued by the Commission, would charge respondents with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondents of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the aforesaid draft of complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in such complaint, and waivers and other provisions as required by the Commission s Rules; and The Commission having thereafter considered the matter and having determined that it had reason to beheve that the respondents have violated the said Acts, and that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, and having thereupon accepted the executed consent agreement and placed such agreement on the pubhc record for a period of thirty (30) days, now in further conformity with the procedure p"escrihed in 34 (b) of its Rules, the Commission hereby issues its complaint, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Bessie Freed is an individual trading as Book' Furs. Respondent Margaret D. Kirias is manager of Book' s Furs. Respondents' offce and principal place of business is located at 428 Lackawanna Avenue, Scranton, Pennsylvania. BOOK S FURS ET AL. 1053 1048 Decjsion and Order 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER It is 01'dered That respondents Bessie Freed, individually and trading as Book's Furs, or under any other name, and Margaret D. Kirias, individually and as manager of Book' s Furs, and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, do forthwith cease and desist from introducing into commerce, selling, advertising, or offering for sale in commerce, or transporting or distributing in commerce any fur product; or from selling, advertising, offering for sale, transporting or distributing any fur product which is made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms "commerce fuy and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act: 1. Which has affxed to any such product a label which represents directly or by implication that the fur contained in such fur product is natural when the fur contained therein is pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored.

2. Unless there is securely affxed to each such product a label showing in words and in figures plainly legible all of the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 3. To which fur product is affxed a label required by Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder:

(a) Which fails to set forth the term "natural" as part of the information required to be included on such label to describe any such product which is not pointed bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored. (b) Which sets forth information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in handwriting.

(c) Which fails to set forth information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the sequence required by Rule 30 of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations.

1054 FEDERAL TRADE CO'JMISSION DECISIONS Order 74 F, (d) Which fails to set forth the item number or mark assigned to each such fur product.

It is furthe1' 0''de1' That respondents Bessie Freed, individually and trading as Book' s Furs or under any other name, and Margaret D. Kirias, individually and as manager of Book' s Furs and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction, into commerce, or ihe sale, advertising or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce, of any fur product; or in connection with the sale advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution, of any fur product which is made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms "commerce fur" and "fur product" are defmed in the Fur Products LabeUng Act, do forthwith cease and desist from: A. Falsely or deceptively invoicing any fur product by: 1. Failing to furnish an invoice, as the term "invoice is defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act, 2. Setting forth information required under Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form.

3. Failing to set forth the term "Persian Lamb" in the manner required where an election is made to use that term instead of the word "Lamb.

4. Failing to set forth on an invoice the item number or mark assigned to such fur product.

B. Falsely or deceptively advertising any fur product through the use of any advertisement, representation, pub- Uc announcement or notice which is intended to aid, promote or assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale, or offering for sale of any such fur product, and which: 1. Fails to set forth in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

2. Falsely or deceptively identifies any fur product as to the name or designation of the animal or animals BOOK S FURS ET AL. 1055 1048 Order that produced the fur contained in the fur product. 3. Fails to set forth the term "Persian Lamb" in the manner required where an election is made to use that term instead of the word "Lamb, 4. Fails to set forth the term "Dyed Broadtailprocessed Lamb" in the manner required where an election is made to use that term instead of the words Dyed Lamb.

5. Fails to set forth the term "natural" as part of the information required to be disclosed in advertisements under the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe a fur product which is not pointed, bleached, dyed, tipdyed or otherwise artificially colored.

6. Fails to set forth all parts of the information required under Section 5 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in type of equal size and conspicuousness and in close proximity with each other.

It is further o1'dered That respondents Bessie Freed, individually and trading as Book's Furs or under any other name, and Margaret D. Kirias, individually and as manager of Book' s Furs, and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, do forthwith cease and desist, except as provided in Section 3 (e) of the Fur Products Labeling Act, from removing or mutilating, or causing or participating in the removal or mutilation of, prior to the time any fur product subject to the provisions of the Fur Products Labeling Act is sold and delivered to the ultimate consumer, any label required by the said Act to be affxed to such fur product without substituting therefor a label conforming to Section 4 (2) of said Act.

It is further ordered That the respondents herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with this order, Complaint 74 F.